I think that the problem with this post is that the person to whom you're apologizing usually doesn't care about the part a mother and some batteries played in the role of whoever being late.

I know that you said that you'd want to hear their learning process, but I can't quite understand why this would be an ideal way to apologize.

To me, this explanation still sounded like one big excuse and I personally wouldn't want to hear it.
It would honestly frustrate me a bit.
Sure, they're taking the blame for everything that had happened; trusting their mother to wake them, and for not checking the batteries.

But it's still irrelevant to the fact that they were late and this person was kept waiting.

For me, a genuine "I'm sorry. It won't happen again, " would suffice and be more of an appealing way to take the blame because the person who was late would be owning up to the mistake and promising to do better.

Yes, they inconvenienced me when they arrived behind schedule, but I don't feel they owe me details into their home life to explain exactly what went on.

However, I would like to point out that apologies to different people warrant different ways to approach an apology.

Such as, if you kept a close friend waiting, then maybe the apology you posted last would be more acceptable. Your friend knows your personal life a bit better and wouldn't mind hearing an explanation in such detail.

But, if it were in a more business-like situation or with someone to whom you're not close to personally, then I doubt that they'd want to hear the details you presented.

Overall, I think this thread makes it clear that apologies are very different and everyone has their own personal preference.

: )

I respect and understand your opinions and where you're coming from, I just don't agree entirely.

I think this is the huge difference between our views and opinions about apologizing.

To be quite honest - I don`t really care what combination of events led to someone being late. What matters to me is that they`re late. If someone was working below me and gave me the apology you typed up... I would be more annoyed than anything else. I really don`t care that the alarm clock didn`t work. I really couldn`t care less about mothers and friends. In fact, I don`t really care about what is going to be done to make sure it doesn`t happen again.

What I DO care about is 1) That the person realizes they have inconvenienced me / caused a problem... And 2) That they are going to take measures not to do it again.

What comes between those two bits - Why they`re late, who else was involved, what they`re going to do to keep it from happening again - come across as nothing more than overkill and excuses.
If I ASK what happened - that`s one thing. If they do it more than once, then I may want to know what is going on and how they plan to make sure it doesn`t happen again.... But if someone showed up late and gave me that spiel, I would basically write them off.

And from the other side - if I`m late for something, I don`t want to have to give a summary of my life just to "apologize". What is important is that I know I`m in the wrong, and that I`m not going to do it again.

The only times I feel differently is if there is a true emergency - someone in the family suddenly died, the person is in an accident, there is a natural disaster (although this one would probably negate the need for an apology at all...), etc, or if there is something that WILL cause the event to repeat. For example, I would expect someone to tell me that because of some change in life or the like they will be unable to keep the agreed schedule from here on out.

Otherwise, quite frankly, I don`t care. You`ve already wasted my time by making me wait - don`t waste more with a long winded explanation.

Right, and that is indeed the difference. I do care. And the first question I would ask if someone said, "I'm sorry. I was late, it won't happen again" would be "Well, WHY are you late?" and the second question I would ask would be "What is your plan to fix it?" If I don't like the answers, then I will have to counsel this individual. If I do like the answer, that's the end of it.

From the other side, it's a golden rule thing. I treat others how I wish to be treated. Or actually, more accurately, I expect to be treated how I treat others. If I report an apology like the one above, and am told I'm making excuses and shifting blame, I become deeply offended. Did I not clearly say "This is my fault" and not lay it on anyone else? Inferences that what I said are "overkill" and "excuses" is a perception that entirely ignores my intent.

You interrupt me, halfway through, and tell me I'm making excuses, I am going to be pretty upset. I may, if I make a future mistake, tell you "I'm sorry, it won't happen again" and leave it at that, but I guarantee I won't mean it as much as I did in my above apology. I also probably won't trust you again.

Your post is interesting. Im also from New Zealand. I went to a co-ed primary school and intermediate school and the genders werent seperated for gym class. The only time it was seperated was for sex ed. We certainly didnt play rugby either... even at my all boys high school (though we had such a variety of different sized guys in our school that were there girls, and considering some of the girls I knew at the time, gender seperation wouldnt have been much of a protective measure). I mean you could join any number of the high school teams but thats about it. Gym class (or PE as we called it) was mostly focused on athletics and athleticism as well as developing skills for sports that require no contact like basketball (in theory its non contact at least), tennis, ultimate frisbee etc.

Anyway... the reason your post is interesting is because it has made me think that perhaps the seperation of gender in high schools in Japan can be better understood as a "conservative" thing rather than a cultural thing. Japan in many ways is a culturally conservative society so widespread views on gender might make it seem like a cultural thing however I can imagine certain members of New Zealand society holding similar views on gender to the widespread view in Japan which makes me think that there are better ways of understanding it.

No no, I wasn't stating that's how it was, I was asking if it was like that. I've never been to the USA, I wouldn't know, but from reading this thread, that's how people are suggesting that people in the USA respond.

And to be honest, that whole paragraph just sounded like a blame shifting lame excuse to me, but maybe that's where we are culturally different. I personally don't think it was a very different tone at all, it was the same excuse with fancy language.

Oh yeah, and as well as that, you can say 'It's all my fault,' but mentioning the alarm clock, and your mum, and the batteries just makes me feel like your just saying it.

If someone were to give that excuse at my school/university, they would be told to stop making excuses, stop wasting time, to sit down and not do it again. Who cares how it happened, as long as it doesn't happen again, it doesn't need a long winded pointless explaination.

And to address some earlier points: There SHOULD be an option for girls to wear trousers in school. How backwards and old fashioned it would be to be forced to were skirts in winter! Some girls are consious about their appearance, and it would be unfair to force them to wear a skirt if they don't want to. Skirts are culturally a female item of clothing, whereas trousers are now considered unisex. That's why it would be odd for males to have the option of wearing skirts.

And if my gym class WASN'T seperated, I would have certainly NOT done it. In England, gym classes (It's called PE over here) are seperated at high school. Why? It's because that's when young people are developing and growing as teenagers. It's the time when they are body consious, and PE usually requires gym clothes, shorts, tshirt and so on. I would feel wholly uncomfortable to be with males at this time. To change the clothing would be impractical when doing sports, so they just seperated the two. If you wanted to do sports with the guys, it was fine, you just had to go to the after school classes.

In class in England, you are usually sat 'girl, boy, girl, boy.' They claim it's to 'encourage people to mix,' but it's really so you aren't sat next to your friends, which for most people are usually of the same sex, and chat and disturb the class. I thought that this idea is pretty old fashioned, but I wasn't particularly bothered because the majority of my friends were male anyway.

Ah. I was unsure of your intent, and I didn't want to assume it. I can't state I represent every American, but I know why I express apologies as I do, and why I expect them to be expressed to me the same way. If how I apologise is typical of how Americans apologise, than the logic I have explained might be typical as well.

Stating reasons of how the mistake was made is not the same as shifting blame. There is no logical progression in the argument that it is. Words matter. That "fancy language" shows not just the sincerity of the apology and an understanding of the mistake that was made, but also gives the person you're apologising to a plan of action for correcting that mistake.

Anyone can say "Sorry, I won't do it again" but it takes someone who has really considered the ramifications of their actions and has a commitment to preventing it in the future to share to decide on a course of prevention.

And I would feel that I had just been verbally spat on for a sincere apology.

Far from ending the event, as has been suggested, this would engender quite a lot of resentment. If done in public, in a classroom, as you suggest, it would be a clear case of "two wrongs don't make a right" and I would report the professor to the dean. It's fine to refuse an apology in private, but to humiliate a student in public with no clear evidence of intent of equivocation is going too far.

I care. And as stated, I would not consider the explanation either long winded or pointless. I would also expect it from others. I'm just going to ask anyway if you leave it off.

Well, schools in England and the United States are dealing with quite a few issues about it. I don't care if it's odd or not, I only care how seriously we take our supposedly egalitarian values. I find the idea that any article of clothing should be allowed for one sex and not the other based solely on what they have in their pants "backwards and old fashioned." I am certainly not interested in forcing girls to wear skirts. I am only against boys not having it as an option. You're English, but the Irish and the Scots might have a thing or two to say about the manliness of a good kilt. There is no rational reason why a dress code, especially in a publicly funded school, should deny clothing to one person over another based on anatomy.


We call it gym or PE interchangeably. I will even sometimes use both in the same sentence. But you'll notice I also use a fair bit of UK English, and always have. I blame the amount of British literature I read growing up...

The problem I have with separated gym classes (or segregated anything), and I am glad mine wasn't, is because it focuses too much on the differences inherent in the changes. By such separations we draw more attention to physical differences than we should, and we fail to emphasise the sameness of people, regardless of anatomy.

I do not believe, and will never believe, that there is some essentialist property inside of genitalia or chromosomes that makes the terms "boy" or "girl" anything besides socially constructed labels that keeps us from recognising the essentialist property that makes us human.

It's my belief, although there are far smarter people than me who have written on the topic, that your uncomfortableness around males while an adolescent stems from cultural baggage.

I can't say I am baggage free, but I've complained about it since elementary school. I've even effected some actual changes in some places. Such as unisex bathrooms on my university campus, and refusal to choose "gender" on certain legal forms. I recognised the hypocrisy as soon as I inquired why boy, girl for certain events and why not blue eyes, brown eyes, or brown hair, blonde hair? No one could give me a suitable answer. I knew then, at perhaps eight or nine, that the whole thing was hogwash. Given my own general affinity for "female-labeled" activities in addition to an affinity for some "male-labeled" activities, everything since adolescence has just confirmed my view.

Treat every one equally and as an individual. That's all I ask. Unfortunately, it is clear that for many people, I ask too much.

As stated, in my schools, teachers broke up obvious groups, but there were no patterns that indicated X was different than Y leading to a pattern. And boy, girl, boy, girl is a pattern showing an "awareness" of sex that inherently draws attention to sex as if that aspect was very, very important. If there had been, I would remember, because I would have protested it.

A lot of my issues here revolve around situations that are mandatory, as opposed to chosen. A decision to enter a private organisation, or even a public one that not a requirement, might mean taking on sex related restrictions. While I would hope those restrictions would eventually fall, I would have the choice not to join that organisation, and if I do, then I am bound to follow those restrictions.

Public schools, where you go to the nearest one, and have no choice, fall under situations that are mandatory.

Well I just suppose our perception of these things are totally different, and that's that. If they didn't want to be humiliated, they shouldn't have a) been late, and b) made up excuses about being late. Our definition of excuses and shifting blame are different, and that's just how it is.

Meh, I'll be honest, I really couldn't care less if a guy wore a skirt or not. I've never encountered a guy that wanted to wear a skirt, so frankly I haven't thought about it.

If you are on about transgendered people who consider themselves female, well, they are female in my eyes and are more than welcome to wear a skirt. And to be honest, if a male wore a skirt in the school I was at (I'm at University now, there is no uniform) just because 'he wanted to,' nobody would care, because the rules on stuff like that are lax anyway.

Completely untrue. These stem from personal issues I don't want to discuss on this forum. I wasn't 'uncomfortable around males,' as mentioned, all my of my closest friends were/are males.

As for school, we were put boy/girl at the start of the year if the teacher didn't know us. If they knew groups that chatted anyway, they'd break us up regardless of gender. But like I said, I thought the whole thing was pretty stupid. Another thing they did, without really saying so, was put high achievers next to ones who struggled. I sat next to some people who struggled and was able to help them out, but other times I was sat next to some really lazy people who COULD NOT be arsed and it was just dragging me down. SO ANNOYING.

Personally, I think the big deal with equality is things like the pay gap between women and men in England. I don't really think seperating people in PE because everyone is developing and hormonal is that big a deal. To be honest, I'd already gone through all of that WAY before high school.

I'm a big feminist, but we have to accept and embrace that the sexes are different, and each have positive things about them. Of course, in many many aspects, we are all the same. I don't see anything wrong in being different, as long as we aren't forced to make life decisions based solely on it.

I actually think we do agree. At least on the words themselves. What I think we disagree on is connotation of phrases. It's a difference of intent vs perception. You're not a mind reader, so if I gave you that apology, you would go to your connotation and accuse of me of shifting blame. My intent would be quite the opposite, to sincerely apologise, offer an account of my behavior, and display commitment to preventing it.

If you said exactly what I said, it would be because you were shifting blame. However, you cannot apply your connotation to me saying it. This is indeed cultural. However the "excuses" would not be "made up." In a sincere apology, the process described would be truthful.

That being said, there is NEVER a reason to reprimand in public. Praise in public, reprimand in private. Public humiliation is unacceptable. Think about how you would like it, if you were late, despite your best efforts, you were asked to apologise, and you did in a way you believe to be sincere and respectfully, and then you are publicly humiliated. I bet that wouldn't go over very well. Especially if you're paying the professor's salary.

It isn't about whether any guy would. It's about whether or not the option exists. If the option doesn't, it's sexist. Plain and simple.

If I had meant MtFs, I would have said so. I'm not necessarily only talking about transgendered individuals. That still places people into neat little boxes that create artificial barriers.

I was more talking about public primary or public secondary. Probably mostly comprehensive schools, in your parlance. I would think most selective institutions would be private, but I'm not really as familiar with the 11-17 UK education as I'd like to be, so I don't really know.

My fault. I should have been clearer. I didn't mean you specifically, I meant you proverbially. I don't know your specific circumstances. I won't push.

I will say I am quite incapable of viewing "boys" as a group or "girls" as a group. It denies too much individuality to be useful.

We didn't have assigned seating. Something I am ever the more grateful for considering your horror stories above.

They are exactly the same to me. We will never solve the pay gap as long as people believe that sex represents an inherent difference.

Furthermore, since you brought up the alphabet soup earlier (LGBT), how do you think THEY feel during adolescence? Being crammed into a group solely because of a sex/gender/sexuality they do not identify with? And what of those that just don't identify AT ALL?

We make it a big deal. We shouldn't. It's not. To quote the bard, it's sound and fury signifying nothing.

I'm an ardent feminist, and not all feminists with XX chromosomes agree with you. I certainly do not. I do not accept that mere biological differences are differences that matter. And I am certainly not about to embrace an idea that I am vehemently against. The differences that matter, that define us, are internal. Our beliefs, our thought processes, our personalities, our preferences... Those things are who we are when we say "I am." The body? So much window dressing.

Having my explanation judged would, quite honestly, be the most upsetting thing to me. As no two people share the same lives, what might be a perfectly acceptable answer for one person may not be for another.

For example, if I apologize and then are asked "Why?" I would give a basic answer - I overslept, it was transportation related, etc, and apologize again. I`m not going to go into why I overslept, or what exactly happened with the transportation. I would never give an extended explanation as even if it isn`t looked at as an excuse, it still seems far too "personal". (I am assuming that these are all business / professional situations - not between friends as that is a totally different thing.) I would feel like I`m making the assumption that the other party cares or should care about my personal life and issues, which seems far too "friendly" for anything professional.

What, by the way, would you consider a good answer? An elaborate detailed one? Something that is a "good story"? I ask this because the main reasons for me ever being late is generally not considered a "good" excuse. But for me personally it is probably the best and most understandable one. Personal bias is going to pop up when judging these answers. I know I wouldn`t really take "there was an accident so more traffic than I had expected" to be a good excuse - you should always leave early enough that a bit of traffic won`t make you late. But for me, this is the main reason I am late for anything.

I live on the other side of a main bridge (the only bridge for a distance) that I have to cross for 90% of the appointments I have. If there is an accident or something happening on the bridge like the retrieval of a suicide from the river below... Traffic stops and can stay stopped for hours. Heading to the next closest bridge is hopeless as in addition to it`s regular traffic it has all the extra from my bridge, so stops as well. I do have a back up plan for when this happens (at least if I`m not already on the bridge when things stop) - but it involves turning around and taking the expressway which is a very out of the way trip and inevitably makes me late or close to it.
To me, saying that there was an accident on or on the other side of the bridge is a very valid excuse for being late. But to someone who doesn`t know that I live where I live, and who doesn`t know my back up plan and the fact that I do leave with plenty of time to spare just to be safe in such situation... Is not going to be impressed with that "excuse" for being 5 minutes late.

And I do not want to have to give someone my whole life outline just to get "forgiveness" for a single case of a 5~10 minute delay. I would be insulted to be asked to explain that far, and doubly insulted if I did tell someone why and they counseled me on it.

The same here for the golden rule - I don`t know what would be a valid reason in someone else`s life. They don`t know what is a valid reason in mine. I don`t want to need to know that in a professional relationship, and I don`t want to burden someone else with that knowledge.

I certainly wouldn`t interrupt, and probably wouldn`t even comment on the situation. But in my mind, I am going to see someone who gives that long and detailed an excuse in a fairly negative light. It doesn`t matter the tone or the meaning behind it - for all I know they could be lying like crazy about the reason. All I really care is that they acknowledge that they are in the wrong and that they aren`t going to let it happen again.
If the reason is that they were completely stupid in managing their time, forgot about the appointment, were doing something very private, etc... All I am doing by making them explain is pushing them to come up with a good lie. (I seriously doubt they`re going to be honest and admit something embarrassing...) Again, everyone makes mistakes and has secrets so judging them on a single event is unfair.

Just wanting an apology, and wanting them to not do it again is what I would consider kindness on my part.

This has gone pretty far off from the original topic, but I think it`s a really interesting subject and am really enjoying the discussion so was going to split it off into another thread about apologies, but as there are so many posts covering apologies and other topics... It is a bit hard to pull off.

Perhaps I wasn't entirely clear what I meant by "like." That sounds a bit too much like it's up to my personal whim. I'll try to explain below.

These are professional settings, yes. And this may be the crux of the issue right here. Yes! It does show I care! And that's the point. As a manager I want my people to know that I care about the reasons for their mistakes. That I am willing to understand the circumstances behind them. I also wish to make sure they themselves understand the reasons so that if they haven't already created a plan to avoid making a mistake in the future, we can work together to create a plan that does so. We're a team, and I would be a horrible manager if I didn't take care of my people.

Likewise, if a manager shows absolutely zero interest in anything beyond an "I'm sorry, I won't do it again," then just as you or MissMisa would question my sincerity based on my phrasing, I would question how much the manager cares about me as a person or how committed he or she is to building a team. Even if I recognise that my assumption may not indicate the manager's intent, I am much less likely to go to him or her for help in the future, and more likely to play "cover-my-arse" when I do make a mistake. A refusal to hear me out in full, when I am doing my best to be sincere, breeds resentment.

I learned a lot of my managerial skills dealing with adolescents, and then later, with sailors and midshipmen in the US Navy. Now, I am a teacher. I take my responsibilities seriously in all my jobs, and when my people make mistakes, it is my duty and obligation to to know what's going on behind those mistakes and help me people deal with them as best I can. Mitigating circumstances can cause mistakes to be made more frequently. Certain factors can be introduced that can make a person more liable to make mistakes. Is this person not at fault? Of course not. Personal responsibility is of paramount importance. And I am not suggesting it is my duty to do my subordinates jobs for them. It is my duty to make sure they have tools to do their jobs. A repeated failure of my crew, my sailors, or my students is as much my fault as theirs.

A good answer is the truth. A better answer is the truth with a plan of action. A bad answer is a lie.

If it's the truth, and if you have a plan for avoiding this in the future, then it's more than valid. I will accept it at face value, until you show me you are making this a pattern, that you are not following through with your plan of action, and can no longer be trusted.

Forgiveness is a bit too much of a religious term for me. "Apology accepted" is as far as I would go. You would only be counseled if you lied. That's all I meant by an answer I wouldn't like. If a student or a sailor lies to me, they're getting counseled. I can usually tell.

The truth is valid. A lie is not. An earnest and truthful, "I can't talk about it, it's personal" is fine. If it becomes a repeat answer, then we're going to have to go into details if you want me to try to help you out and be understanding about an ongoing issue.

I don't see why. Shouldn't you give the person the benefit of the doubt? Don't they deserve to be taken at their word until a pattern occurs? How would you suggest to help them if you don't know how they made the error in the first place?

Really? I admit embarrassing things all the time when I make a mistake. I believe it to be the right thing to do. I do not lie. Just the other day I screwed up and admitted, "I read the wrong line on the schedule. I'm sorry. It won't happen again. I'm color coding my calendar to make sure it doesn't." To me that was the perfect apology. Sincere, with a reason, and a plan of action. And it took all of five seconds to say aloud. If someone turned around said, "I don't care why, and I don't care about your plan to fix it," I would be shocked and offended. Clearly this guy doesn't think of me as a person, I might as well be a machine.

I'm not sure I understand this. Kindness is done without obligation. An apology, both sides, indicates some sort of act that requires one. I'm not sure I would see an apology as kindness, but rather as mandatory.

I don't think you should be talking about "England". At my high school in England, most PE lessons were mixed! The only time there was any separation was when we done two sports at the same time, say netball and basketball! Even then, it was the pupils choice!

Same thing goes for the classes. It was always up to the teacher to decide how to sit their pupils! Some teachers done it alphabetically, others boy girl, boy girl, and some just didn't care at all!

I really don`t think that demanding a detailed explanation and plan for the future is evidence of "caring". It would feel - to me - like the manager is overstepping the bounds of a professional relationship. My personal life isn`t really any of their business. A good business team doesn`t require a friendship, and wanting to know my personal situation is hopping into friendship territory.
You seem to think of a lack of personal interest as a lack of caring - I see it as a boundary. Personal issues don`t belong in a professional team... If someone does have incredible personal issues that make it impossible for them to fulfill their position... No matter how big of a tear jerker, or how incredibly wonderful a person they are - they should be removed from the team and either moved elsewhere or given time off to recover. It`s unfair to everyone else to have a personal relationship and accept the reasons behind someone screwing up because of a personal situation.
Whatever the reason may be, the end result is the same, and even if you say that it only sounds like you`re personally judging the reasons - it is in the end down to personal whim.

I think there is a huge difference between someone in a position of teaching and guidance, and someone simply in a business relationship. I have completely different expectations for someone I am simply working with, and for someone I am responsible for. A student needs life guidance. A new employee in training needs work guidance. Someone who just happens to be on the same team or who I just have a passing work connection to should not, and it is not my place to offer them guidance.

So... A good lie with a fake plan of action would be okay too, right?

But there is no way to confirm whether it is the truth, and whether they honestly plan to go through with the plan. Sure, you can`t know whether an "I`m sorry" is honest - but if it was a fluke event it shouldn`t really matter. What matters - and you seem to agree with this - is that it doesn`t happen again. I would pretty much do the same as you are saying here - I would accept the apology at face value, and accept the promise that it won`t happen again. If it DOES happen again, and if there is some pattern, etc... Then I would look into the issue and care about what is causing this.

But you can`t always tell. There are some very good liars out there, and they can be very convincing. This is probably one of the biggest reasons I personally prefer the apology style I do. There is very little room for lying other than one that would become obvious - if they aren`t sorry and aren`t going to make sure it doesn`t happen again, it will be pretty clear to me because it probably will happen again.

That the issue is being repeated is a problem. I`m talking about a one off. Things change when the problem happens over and over. And I would expect someone to tell me something in detail if it is something that will prevent them from following the agreed schedule. (As saying that it won`t happen again would be a lie on their part, I would be upset that they didn`t tell me.)

Actually, this is pretty close to what I am saying. I am willing to take someone`s word and give them the benefit of a doubt on the first incident. Everyone makes mistakes, and everyone deserves to learn from their mistakes. The key difference is that you want to know the reasons behind that first mistake, but I am happy to take their word that they are sorry and that they won`t happen again without knowing anything deeper.
If this does repeat, well, that is different and I would ask what is going on. But until them, I would be willing to accept an apology and believe that they do intend not to do it again - regardless of the details.

I was thinking something more along the lines of something much more personal and embarrassing. Reading the wrong line on a schedule is a mistake, but it wouldn`t rank in the same territory as... say... having a sudden attack of diarrhea on the train and leaking, then running home to change. Or say, having a rare fight with the spouse and them getting mad and taking the car you needed for work. Or any of the other countless situations that really are not something you want to have to explain.
I would never say something like that - but it is indeed irrelevant to me. It`s not that I don`t care. It`s the details I don`t care about.
You know you`re in the wrong? Okay.
You plan to prevent the same thing from happening again? Okay.
The whys and hows aren`t the important part. I trust people to actually make a plan of action and follow it without telling me about it.

I meant it as a trust related thing. I guess "kindness" wasn`t the best wording.
I don`t want to intrude into anyone`s life. I don`t want to put them on the stand for a simple mistake or problem. If they do know they`re in the wrong, and they do intend to make sure it doesn`t happen again - how they do this is up to them.
I wouldn`t want anyone to intrude into my personal life and personal affairs for a simple mistake or problem. I feel a person who accepts my honest apology and my word that it won`t happen again is going to win a lot more points in my book than someone who wants to know exactly why and exactly how I plan to do that. I would feel that I am being put on the spot, and that if I don`t have the type of answer and plan they want to hear that it will negatively effect their view of me.
I can only imagine someone else would feel similarly if I asked the same thing of them.

I think that a lot of this is a cultural thing, and that I really have lived here long enough that the whole idea of being made to defend myself seems a lot more demeaning than just ending the issue with an apology.

I would disagree as to what constitutes friendship territory. This certainly would not constitute friendship territory. In fact, I would be less likely to explain myself to a friend, because a friend would know I had a good reason, or I would be apologising for not having a good reason, too.

Personal issues that cause mistakes become professional considerations. And I concur, that someone should be removed if the personal issues become a pattern. The goal is to find out how they can be prevented from becoming a pattern.

Eventually, I must make a decision on if to remove someone, as is mentioned above. I will do this only if I think the issue is unmanageable. My people deserve the chance to work it out before I fire them.

I agree. Yet I am not the one who needs an apology if I am merely a coworker or a passing connection. That's what managers (or officers) are for. The manager represents the team and can take an apology for me. I should not be involved in asking for one. It isn't my job, and I am not personally offended. If I was, I would spend an awful lot of my time angry at my coworkers. All of my recent comments, and my comments below, presume I am the one who heads the team. As a simple team member, I am not going to touch an administration issue (which an apology for behavior in the workplace falls under). It's not my job, and should rightly be considered meddling by both coworker and team leader.

If you're total jerk, sure. But when I find out you lied to me, blatantly, there are going to be consequences. But yes, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Just be prepared to get disciplined. If I had the power, I would probably fire you. If you were a midshipman, the honor board would kick you out for that alone. Your mistakes would be immaterial next to your lie.

Oh, trust me, as I am sure you know, lies about performance unravel themselves rather quickly. Better to be truthful, because you may repeat the mistake six months later, and it may be as flukey as the first time. I quite disagree that a plan of action should not be discussed immediately. I think it's only fair to show commitment to your assertion that it will not happen again.

Not always, but as previously stated, when it does happen again, and it becomes obvious I was lied to, the hammer will fall. I take that much, much more seriously than a good worker who is seriously trying to combat a personal problem and may repeat a mistake somewhere down the line.

)

You can sum up a reason and a plan of action in two sentences, maybe even one with a subordinate clause. No more than ten to fifteen words, tops. I see how you could see it as personally prying. I don't see how you can fail to see why I do not see it that way. And I certainly don't understand the unwillingness to allow a sincere apologiser to say it.

Yep, that's the difference. I think that information should be included in the first apology, and I think I've probably explained why a few times now as we trade posts.

Oh, surely you don't expect I require that much information do you? That's a whole different level than the examples I gave or what I would expect. Simply saying you were ill and needed longer than usual to recover and that it was a freak occurrence that cannot be adequately planned for would cover my requirements. As for the spouse, that would be a "family emergency" and the same reason for no plan of action would be provided. Those are not lies; they are vague, but adequately reflect the level of detail I would require.

The whys and the hows are as important as the the admission of guilt and the promise to avoid a pattern of mistakes. An apology is incomplete without them, either as the apology giver, or the apology receiver. I trust people to make a plan of action and follow it, but I'd like to know what it is. If they need help, I can offer that help. Trust, but verify.

I'm still not following.

Indeed, it is up to them, but I still feel it is part of my duty to evaluate their plan and to offer advice. I do this because I care, and because it is part of my job. I have no interest in belittling them, causing them discomfort, or blowing holes in the plans they do have. I do it because I wish to give direction. As a supervisor, manager, team leader, naval officer, or a teacher, giving direction is in my job description.

I would want someone to show they cared enough about me as a member of their team to consider the reasons for my mistake, and work with me on preventing those reasons from reoccurring. I would certainly not feel on the spot, nor would I be concerned that my plan of action would be insulted or seen negatively, and if there were flaws in it, I would want them to be pointed out. God knows, when I do make mistakes, I can use all the help I can get!

Well, if I ever need to apologise to you, will you accept my full apology, knowing the spirit of sincerity in which it is given? And perhaps give someone who uses the same apology "format" the benefit of the doubt that they are not equivocating or evading blame, but rather are sincere?

That's what it comes down to. If asked to explain yourself, you would feel demeaned. If I was cut off or thought negatively of because I explained myself, I would feel demeaned. And do feel demeaned, actually, which is what started this whole side discussion.

I understand why Japanese people are not interested in hearing my full apology. I just wish they understood why I feel I need to give the full apology, and how upsetting it is to have half of it ignored, especially when given in complete sincerity.

There should be some attempt to accept both kinds of apologies depending on who they come from and understanding the spirit in which they are offered.

MissMisa chose the reasons. I just rewrote it. It's not my fault, it's not my fault! :mtongue:

All seriousness, I probably would not ever utter such an apology in reality. For one thing, I don't wake up late. I haven't been able to sleep past 0650 in years. I haven't need an alarm clock since Fall 2003.

It was probably a bad example for a serious full apology. The one I wrote about misreading the schedule is probably much more realistic.

Every job I have ever been late to has asked why if I left it out. When I was a supervisor at a cinema, and I was trained to ask why. In the Navy, I was asked why. Sometimes I even had to submit "why" in paper form! The reasoning behind the full apology I have defended here made sense then, and it makes sense now.

As I was reading the comments about the obasans, I was reminded that I have been dealing with this behavior every morning on the train platform. Except its not an obasan..... it is from two 40-50 yr old American men in Texas. Rude, inconsiderate and overbearing is a learned behavior and not limited to cultures.

Natto - well Tsuawuki its seems there is about half of Japan that agrees with you .... and the other half with me. :rolleyes:

The apology issue is not a problem for me. I was raised by someone who always expected forst the apology and then details to verify I knew what my mistake was. I prefer the briefer Asian assumption that the reason is known, though I tend to lapse into what I learned growoing up.

The segration in schools is nothing new to me. From at least 6th grade on, my U.S. public schools all segregated the PE classes and sport (that was 6 different shools in three different parts of the country, so it was a good sampling.) Unless it was homemaking or shop, it didn't usually happen in the classroom - at least not formally.

The only thing I would expect to have problems with (when I finally get to visit) is the smoking.

Is that so? Every other school around here does all that. Maybe that's just this area then or something. Sounds pretty lucky you didn't have an annoying seating plan D: But I wouldn't wanna be with all the guys, ew. LOL.

I went to a state school (aka, one you DON'T pay for, public, private, blah blah blah are terms that are confusing) It's the most average school you'll get, slap bang in the middle of the league tables, in the middle for the area, in the middle for money spent on it. *Shrug* I just presumed that since all of my friends from other schools are the same it was just a regulation thing in England. My friend who goes to a private school (one you DO pay for) has the same thing. Segregated PE classes, and boy/girl seating. (He is down South, I'm up North)

Actually, come to think of it, you could choose whether or not to be 'segregated'. If you picked GCSE PE, then boys and girls were mixed. Everyone else was just in girl and boy groups because they didn't really care about PE. It wasn't strict though to be honest, if the guys were playing football and we were doing something else, you could just go and join them if you wanted to. To be honest, it seems like it was done for practical reasons rather than anything else. It's easier for them to just say - girls over there, boys over there, instead of fiddling around with alphabetical orders and all that. (PE teachers are lazy :p Lol I so hated PE.)

To adress the whole apology thing, I do feel our opinions are different. I still kind of don't get why you need a big 'explanation.' I would consider myself a good manager for NOT asking for a big explanation because it would show I have faith that they will not do it again, and an apology is enough to show their sincerity. Asking for anything more than that just seems like I'm suggesting they are untrustworthy, and making a big deal out of being 5 minutes late.

'I'm sorry I'm late, I slept in.' Would be enough for me. 'I'm sorry,' is a term that means to me that you understand your mistake and you won't do it again. 'I slept in,' is the reason, the admission of guilt, taking the blame yourself. If you need to justify your apology, then I would feel you are being unsincere about saying sorry, since you need to elaborate on it.

Maybe you are always asked 'why,' but I never am. Maybe it's not that 'nobody cares,' it's just that people have enough faith in you to know that you aren't going to do it again. And if you say you aren't going to do it again, then don't. If it's something ongoing and unavoidable, which means in the future you could be late again, that's where an explanation is needed.

Making a excuse is different than giving an apology. You are missing one important word in your "apology".

I am sorry I am late, BUT my mom didn't wake me up when I asked her to the night before...

In my experience Americans don't apologize when they feel they don't need to. The "but" negates the apology, and excuses like the one you wrote are like fingernails on a blackboard.

If you do not want to shift the blame to your mother, then don't mention her, because that is exactly what it sounds like you are doing. If your mother isn't trustworthy, then why are you asking her to wake you up? If you want to take responsibility, then take responsibility and apologize without making excuses.

But you aren't really going to ask me to believe that apology above is something you would really say in an actual conversation is it?

Did you notice how friendly most people in Texas are until they get behind the wheel? I and my wife never saw anything like it. Talk about contrasting.:ywave:

>_>

So,

My question would be if that was equal opportunity movement, or if it was limited to girls. As long as the option for members of either group to crossover to the other group exists, I see no problem. If girls could join boys, but boys couldn't join girls, in some ways I might see that as worse.

I don't need a big explanation. I need a small, to the point explanation. All I need to know is the reason and how a plan of action will prevent that reason for reoccurring. And a lot of this is hypothetical, my attempt to use the various scenarios suggested by you.

In most jobs I have been in, five minutes late wasn't even noticeable. Five minutes late to a specific meeting might be, it would depend on what was being covered how disruptive being late would be.

If I was five minutes late to work in my current position, no one would even notice. First class doesn't begin until 0855, and although there is a very brief "good morning everyone" it does not occur until a full ten minutes after the "on time" time of 0820. And this is a Japanese position. In the United States, I would expect this to be even looser (as has been my experience).

In the Navy, this is quite a bit different. Being five minutes late to muster is just as bad as being five hours late to muster if you're enlisted. The only thing you'd be expected to say in public would be "No excuse, sir." In private, you would be asked for the reasons and the plan of action. If you refused or equivocated, you would be counseled. In the case of other mistakes, like perhaps a disruptive disagreement, I would suggest you look at the "silver surfer" incident from Crimson Tide. That is, in my opinion, a good example of officership in regards to apologies and explanations.

For officers, being five minutes late to O-Call isn't nearly as big of deal (it's a lot more corporate), and you probably wouldn't even be asked for an apology the the first time. The more I think about it, if you were late again, you probably still wouldn't be asked for an apology. In fact, you would be asked why you were late and how you were going to fix it, and not an apology at all. I think in that case saying "I'm sorry, I won't do it again" would be seen as the equivocation! And that would not be very healthy, because it would be guaranteed to piss off the executive officer. I can just hear the XO now, "I don't give a good God damn if you're sorry. I only care what the hell you did, why the hell you did it, and how the hell you expect to fix it." Let's just say XOs are generally very colorful individuals, and what is considered "professionally acceptable" speech is very different in the Navy. That behavior wouldn't be acceptable in most civilian corporate structures.

What seems to be the issue is the belief that a request for a reason and a plan of action is suggesting that there is no trust between senior and subordinate. This isn't the case at all. Now if the senior checked up on the subordinate after receiving the reason and the plan of action, that would demonstrate a lack of trust.

From my point of view, I'm sorry shows remorse. But you can show remors for repeated actions you have no intent to cease. You can even show remorse for actions which you are justified in having done. Showing remorse is not the same as an apology. In a very extreme example, I'm sorry that I had to kill that terrorist when I launched a bomb at him, but I didn't make a mistake in doing so. I may say sorry to his family, and I might wrestle with my conscience, and I would be worried if I didn't, but I would do it again.

A reason shows why you understand that the mistake was yours. A plan of action shows your commitment to the promise you made to prevent it from happening again.

Your word "justify" is at the heart of our disconnect. There is no attempt at justification. Justification would eliminate guilt, and apology would not be necessary. "I killed the terrorist, but he was attempting to shoot civilians" is a justification that eliminates guilt, but it doesn't (and I hope to God it never) eliminates remorse. I'm sorry is part of an apology, but it does not stand alone as an entire apology.

If I made a mistake, and I accept that mistake is mine, I have the obligation to show more than just my remorse. I have an obligation to show remorse, account for my actions, and offer evidence of my commitment to change. That is an apology (tack on "in my opinion" of course).

Well, given my outstanding evaluations over the years, I don't presume anyone fails to trust me or lack faith in me. And as stated, just because I expect a full apology, doesn't mean I lack faith in or fail to trust my subordinates. If I did, I wouldn't ask them for a plan of action at all- I would write it for them as I would a child, and any adult I have to provide a plan of action for is an adult I need to fire.

It really does boil down to a cultural thing. If an explanation is an expected part of the dialogue, then you would be remiss in not providing it. If an explanation is an integral part of your sincerity, you will be upset to find your sincerity questioned.

This reminds me of an old story about two captains of scouting parties from different nation states meeting for the first time. They approach each other differently. One with a weapon out, pointed towards the other, one with a weapon sheathed. Both consider each other hostile and charge. This event causes a war between the nation states. Years later, the survivors make peace and attempt to find out what went wrong:

In one culture, showing your weapon is a sign of respect, a way of saying "You are my equal." In the other, showing your weapon is seen as, "I'm hostile, I plan to attack you." A sheathed weapon would be disrespectful to the first culture (taunting, really, "You are not my equal, I don't even need to bother to pull my weapon, you are so inferior"), and respectful/peaceful to the second.

This is precisely what we have here. Actions (through words) that have entirely different meanings depending on the culture. Hopefully no one is going to die over it, but it does show the difference between intent and perception, and how they can breed ill feelings.

We need to be aware of these differences before we accuse someone of insincerity or equivocation.

I think that is OK if you are dealing with children, but with adults this sounds strange to me. Beyond "why" to require an action plan on how it will not happen again, again might be OK for children, but if you were my supervisor I would seriously consider filing a complaint or looking for a new job. That is incredibly condescending.

I have worked for a handful of Japanese bosses, and 1 minute late has been enough to merit a comment.

One time I was supposed to pick up a client at 8:00 AM. At 8:03 I received a call from my boss asking me where I was. The client had called him at 8:01 to complain I hadn't arrived to pick him up. Now when I deal with Japanese men I show up 15 minutes early, and find that often times, they are already there.

I think we are seeing Navy thinking versus civilian thinking.

I think it shows a lack of respect, which is fine for a teacher to student or a sergeant to private, but doesn't work in the workplace or between equals.

I'm sorry doesn't excuse the behavior, it shows an admission of error, or in other words, remorse.

If it were to happen again and again "I'm sorry" is going to clearly mean less and less and will soon become unacceptable as the speaker clearly isn't feeling remorse, as the behavior hasn't changed.

"My mom forgot to wake me up," does not show remorse or understanding the mistake was yours.

Even "My mom forgot to wake me up, so I am not going to trust her to wake me up anymore," is still lame, as you are blaming your mom, but then are taking responsibility for her inaction.

Again, this sounds like military protocol, but not how civilians act.

If any of my friends "offered evidence of his commitment to change" after showing up late, I would just scratch my head. If a date did that to me, I doubt I would be asking for a next date.

Okay, we need to back up. I'm going to presume "you" is proverbial here, and not addressed to me specifically. I'm not sure you read everything between my response you posted above and now, because the unsuitability of that "apology" was already addressed.

You are absolutely right that the "but" negates the apology. I even said so in the previous post. But implies justification, which implies lack of guilt, and that negates any acceptance of guilt.

I did say I was trying to reformulate the apology MissMisa wrote, and I clearly failed. I have said earlier it was a bad example. I have also previously admitted that such an apology as the one above is unrealistic.

Please go back and consider my "schedule" apology which is far more realistic.

It was directed at the wordy apology you made a page or two ago, but if you have decided it is not a realistic apology, that is good enough for me.

This is your perception, not my intent. All this does is provide more evidence for what I have already stated. You may disagree with my managerial style, but it is unfair to attribute condescension to me. My respect for you as a valued member of the team is why I would ask in the first place! If I didn't respect you, I would not care, I would not ask, I would assign you a plan of action, and I would fire you if you did not carry it out. I certainly wouldn't do that to you unless I believed you to have thoroughly earned such treatment.

I've heard this. I've dealt with this on rare occasions. I always try to show up ten minutes early every where I go period. In any culture. My point was that even different jobs have different views. Even in Japan.

In the case of the XO, certainly, but I have spent far more time as a civilian. I don't speak for the Navy, I am trying to describe my own experiences with in it as both subordinate and as senior. This is to give a wider range of experiences, not to suggest it is my only experience.

I disagree. It's the child or trainee I wouldn't even expect the ability to formulate a plan from. My belief in your abilities to do so shows how much I respect you as a person capable of doing so. That I wish to work with you on your plan of action shows that you matter, you can certainly refuse my help, and I won't hold it against you, but I'm making myself available in case you need me.

I do not concur that remorse is an admission of error. I can be remorseful about an action that I felt was not a mistake. I'm sorry alone does not an apology make. In the example I offered above, I'm sorry I killed the bad guy. I didn't make a mistake.

See above.

Addressed.

I think you're getting hung up on that. It constitutes a minority of my experience, although I admit it does constitute my first experiences (an admitted bias).

We were speaking professionally. I would indeed just say sorry to a friend and leave it at that. There's a good chance he or she already knows about the reason. In detail. In minute detail. Or is about to find out shortly.

If a date did that to you on the first date, I would find it odd as well. You have no continuous relationship. A girlfriend is something else entirely. If you've never offered evidence of a commitment to change in a committed relationship, I would be very surprised.

I was attempting to reformulate MissMisa's apology into one that had what I considered the requisite parts of an apology. There is absolutely no way I would have such a situation occur to me, so I can't say how exactly I would apologise for it.

I think you are mixing up the uses of "I'm sorry".

"I'm sorry about your father's death" is not an apology for any action the speaker did (assuming, of course, he didn't cause the father's death).

That is very different from "I apologize for your father's death" which is an admission of guilt.

So saying "I'm sorry" is showing remorse, but is not necessarily an admission of guilt.

However, an admission of guilt without any remorse is not an apology.

"I was late. So what?" is an admission of guilt without showing remorse.

I think you can show admission of guilt and show remorse in a mistake you made by apologizing and saying "I'm sorry."

As for the military comparison, I don't think I am hung up on it, I am just saying it appears they do things differently than the civilian world, which might help explain your perspective that the non-military members here do not share.

As an adult, I would not take your action plan to help ensure I am not tardy again as condescending. Supervisor or not, I would not take it as showing me care or respect. I would call it demeaning. They may do this in the military, and maybe it is because they can, but I don't think this would work in the working world unless it was something I thought I needed your help with.

This is a valid disagreement on the nature "sorry."

This is not remorse. This is empathy. The two are not the same. I do not mean this use of "sorry."

I concur on your conclusions, but I do not concur on the above premise that being sorry for someone's condition is the same as being remorseful.

I concur with this, and have already stated it. A apology is made up of parts. Those parts together create an apology. And admission of guilt without remorse is definitely not an apology.

I agree. We disagree on what constitutes an apology beyond "I'm sorry."

There some fairly large differences, yes. However, there are others who have expressed knowledge of the "Trust, but verify" approach to apologies. Not all of them have been in the military. I am not alone. I was putting forward a theory as to why non-Americans think Americans equivocate or deflect blame. If I give an apology in sincerity, with all the parts I consider necessary for an apology, than I am not equivocating or shifting blame. I am doing the opposite.

I think we have a misunderstanding. I have no interest in providing a plan of action for you. Helping you, yes, if you need it. That's part of my job. You're an adult, if you understand your mistake, you should be able to come up with one on your own.

Only if you prove yourself incapable of doing so would I do it for you. And that is way beyond the scope of an initial apology.

Our disagreement stems from whether it is reasonable or not to expect and/or ask for that plan of action to be briefly outlined. I think it is. You think it is not.

So in the end, the reason we disagree is because what you think the word 'sorry' means is different to what I think it means.

With my example, 'I didn't wake up because my alarm batteries ran out and my mum didn't wake me up' would you accept it would have just been better to say, 'I'm sorry I'm late.'? Or what would you actually say instead?

I'd never do this either, but if someone ended up doing it, they'd have to figure out how to say sorry somehow.

Yeah, I went to a public school as well! It had a pretty decent reputation, but I think it was still near the middle of the league tables! Only thing I can say with certainty was that, it wasn't the best, and it wasn't the worst, lol.

In my area, all the private schools were single sex schools, so our topic doesn't come into it.

I think there were good and bad things about the mixing for PE. For one, that's where I changed my mind about girls' abilities. Before playing basketball with girls, I always thought that girls were "weaker" at sports than boys. But I found that some girls were bad-ass and were running circles around us boys lol. But on the negative side, the boys were less serious and didn't play properly when there were girls. They always wanted to flirt or something!

To be honest, I think the best thing to do, is mix PE class but have levels. So, the best play together, the worst together. Just like they did in all the other subjects! I spent 1 week in the worst math group there was, and I wanted to kill myself! When they moved me up to a better group with everyone having the same level, I felt like I was learning!

Without the context of previous quotes, I'm not sure. I would say it's a definite possibility.

I would consider both those to be incomplete. The first shows no remorse and does appear to shift blame. It's not an apology at all. The second only shows remorse for a specific mistake, but nothing else. Is the second one better than the first? Apples and oranges. The first isn't even an apology. The second is not a complete apology. I would accept neither.

Honestly, I don't know. I tried so hard to keep my mother out of everything I did, at all times, even as a child and as an adolescent, that it would be hard for me to get into a situation where I might reasonably say, "my mother didn't do X" and not obviously lying. She was the very last one to know about anything. Using her as any part of an explanation would be an obviously ploy to avoid giving a real reason for my mistake.

I haven't lived with my mother for many years, and in the few months I did live in her house while I was a working adult, I involved her in absolutely nothing, even less than when I hadn't been an adult. I had my own key, my door, my own money, and we talk more now that I am 7,000 miles away than we ever talked when were on opposite sides of the house.

If I had asked my mother to wake me up, and she had failed to do so, I probably wouldn't mention her at all. She would have been unnecessary if I had checked the batteries on my alarm clock, so I probably would just mention the alarm clock. This is pure speculation, but I would probably say something like this:

"I'm sorry I'm late. It was my responsibility to make sure my alarm clock worked, and I did not. I am investing in a multi-alarm system so that I can make sure this does not happen again."

Remorse - check
Understanding why the mistake happened - check
Admission of guilt - check
Plan of action to prevent the mistake again - check
Promise to implement the aforementioned plan - check

This apology is complete.

We had a mixed top class PE group, then Set 2 Girls, Set 2 Boys, Set 3 Girls, Set 3 Boys. I was in the lowest set for PE because I didn't like it, and when I got the opportunity I didn't go because I wanted more time to do actual coursework. (Yeah I really really hated PE haha.) I was in top set for everything else. God knows how I got in top set maths, haha.

The education usually puts all the best resources in the middle sets, because they can push up the league tables this way. The bottom set are usually labelled as 'no hopers' so they just leave them alone. Top set are usually able to manage by themselves and get the results they need on their own, so all the resources go into pushing the middle sets to get the grades. Pretty crappy way of doing it IMO, but hey. (I did Education Sociology)

Anddd this is way off topic :p

Lol, fair enough then. I suppose it depends on the situation, if you said that in (my) school all the other kids would be a bit like, LOL WTF. But it would probably be best in a work environment. I still wouldn't say that though. (Then again we know that neither of us would actually do it.)

Frankly I am so far removed from the "student" part of the "teacher-student" relationship, that I don't even remember being late to classes and being asked to apologise in public for it. My classes were so large (core classes) or so informal (senior thesis, pedagogy, upper level history and English, graduate studies) that if I had been late I would have been A) unnoticeable or B) not disturbing anyone.

That's university. In high school, I was always that "get the best seat first" person, and I was never late to class unless I was detained by a teacher or school function, and then I had a note.

I know that when students are late to my classes and actually disrupt it, I expect the full apology above. And I expect it from my Japanese students. Suffice to say, I rarely have a student significantly late enough to disrupt the class as a whole that does not have a very good reason for doing so, and it usually comes in the form of a note that tells me where they were and is signed (or hankoed) by another teacher. At the worst a student comes in after the "Hello, Class" but before the lesson has started. I might twit them a bit, but not enough to crossover into humiliation. Enough to know I'm not upset and enough for them to avoid doing it in the future. I do not ask for an apology of any sort, lone "sorry" or otherwise.

In regard to the apologies...

I think we all need to step back and realize some very important things in this discussion.

First, the original example was not a natural one. Tsuwabuki did his best to sort of change it into the style of apology he does make, and would expect from someone else. I think it is unfair to judge things based on that example.

Second, this style of apology has clearly worked for him and in his surroundings outside of Japan. This isn`t really a discussion about why people aren`t accepting his apologies, or why people think he has strange expectations when it comes to apologies.

There is no "right or wrong" in this. There is only cultural difference - something that exists even within the same language and the same country. It is an interesting subject because we can compare these differences, and see some of the reasons that they clash - even when the sentiment behind them is similar. It`s also not something that is talked about in depth all that often.

There is nothing wrong about his apology style, just as there is nothing wrong in mine, MMM`s, MissMisa`s, etc. There is just a difference between what is normal in our lives and locations. I probably wouldn`t be happy with Tsuwabuki`s apology or if he expected that sort of apology from me - but I`m sure that it is the other way around in his case. He wouldn`t be satisfied with mine or my expectations. This is where cultural stress emerges, so it is a wonderful thing to find the conflict points and understand the thinking behind them.

+1

Hear, hear!

This is precisely why I started the topic in the first place. To identify culturally induced feelings I have when confronted with modes of thought that are different from my own.

Apologies and gender issues took on the forefront, but some of the others are just as connected. I can't eat things that look at me. I find it creepy. My Japanese peers have no issue. I cannot eat natto because I associate the sliminess with things that are either not food or are food that has spoiled. I have trouble driving on Japanese roads because they seem tiny, curvy, without the "safety features" I associate with properly built roads, and so I get scared when driving on them.

This is all about cultural association. What feelings and meaning we attach to words, actions, tastes, smells, even architecture.

I think it is a good discussion to help us understand each other better.

I agree~

Though I did hear the 'alarm clock and mum' excuse loads in high school, haha. Others included 'I missed the bus,' 'Traffic,' and 'An old lady fell over so I had to help her.' The type of people that were constantly late were rarely the type to bother helping old ladies, but hey :p

hello
 

im danica.. new member of japan furom.. how's everyone??:vsign:

I think it boils down to individual expectations and personality as well as culture. Maybe even just the kind of job you're in. I've worked in a variety of fields and I tailor my (thankfully rare) apologies to suit the receiver. One place I work (with children) seems to favor the wordy kind of apology that tsuwabaki was talking about. It's a cover all bases to ensure no misunderstanding kind of approach.

Old boss, however, would have responded to that kind of apology (ie, I did XT I will now do Y and Z to ensure blah blah) with a "Oh well DONE! Do you want a $*(@^%* gold star? Get out of my office and go do some damn work." and basically expect the guilty party to swiftly make up the error in time, money or better work than waste breath on \'mea culpa\'.

and both work environments are very typically english.